Mind the Gap

Oh, what a motley crew is starting to collect on the social networks.  First there  was Netflix raising their prices.  Then there was Bank of America and Verizon adding fees.  And, most recently, there was the Susan G. Komen Foundation making funding changes.

Some of the actions of these organizations were reversed.  Some weren’t.  But all seemed to be missing an important component--a proactive approach to customers and contributors.

One would think, with large organizations like these, that public relations consultants or social-networking gurus would have been hired years ago to use innovation and market knowledge to gauge ahead of time through sample studies what kind of reaction new policies would get.  One would think that organizations of this size would find a way to “float” an idea to customers and/or contributors without flat-out presenting it or dictating it.  One would think that organizations of this size would find a cleaner way of presenting their initiatives than the approach of shoot first, apologize later.

What kind of person might fill such a position for a company of this size?

• Someone with strong customer service skills;
• Someone with strong analytical skills, in order to analyze trends, news sources, and social networking to determine best practices;
• Someone who has the courage and support to bring their input to the boardroom;
• Someone who has the communication skills to articulate and be diplomatic about keeping customers and stockholders (or donors) happy.

I wonder where these companies could find someone like that, says this blogger as she reviews her experience and skills and sighs.

Even more importantly, I wonder what company will do the shoot first, apologize later tactic next?

The Followers

Last week I found an article in LinkedIn (via Forbes), that struck me as interesting.  The article talked about how good leaders are created by their charges just as much as they create winning teams.

Oddly enough, I've never considered the fact that I may have contributed to my past supervisors or leaders.  My perception of not having contributed to their growth as leaders comes from the fact that very few of them show interest in how my story continues.  I'm usually the one reaching out to see how they are and what they are doing, and not the other way around.  Does that mean, according to Forbes contributor Mike Myatt, that my leaders of the past are missing the complete picture?

Maybe I'm taking this too far, but the co-author of the article, Lieutenant Colonel Michael Devine of the US Army, stated the following that led me to that conclusion:

In most literature leaders are openly encouraged to understand how their own traits, strengths, weaknesses and habits affect their relationships, decision making, style, etc. What I think is not addressed is the criticality of a leader’s ability to reflect and understand the impact that the people he/she leads has on his/her own personal development and growth.

In other words, for a leader to truly be great, he/she must accept and understand that the people they have the privilege to lead will indelibly shape the kind of person and leader they become. If you are good at the profession of leadership, then you habitually form close relationships with your team members. This inevitably causes you to internalize and incorporate the team’s traits as surely as the team will internalize your behaviors and disposition.

I can't say that I blame my leaders for the lack of follow-up; as Devine states, "the literature" teaches leaders to focus on what they bring to the table and not what the table brings to them, and maybe I don't warrant the follow-up in the eyes of those who used to lead me.  But for years I've thought of myself as missing something by wanting to know how the people I used to lead were doing.  I've been told by other leaders to let bygones be bygones.  But these people lent something to me, too, I inwardly respond, biting my tongue.

And maybe it's not a good idea to spend so much energy trying to focus my connections on just those who led me, but those who followed me, too.

*****

Since I left Grainger in April I have kept in touch with my former charges at Grainger in San Francisco, and with a couple of folks on Facebook at the Oakland location.  Two days before I left for Southern California I got a call from one of the employees at the Oakland office, and the phone was passed around from one former follower to another.  I was a big phone channel proponent at the Oakland office, and I asked about their stats.  Were they still working to lead the district in stats?

Yes, they answered me proudly.  We still lead the district.

Nine months after I left, I still had an effect on them.  I contributed.  Only a follower would have been able to tell me that.  And they called me to tell me that.

The Purpose of a Business Page, Social-Networking Style

I spend a lot of time on the social networks these days looking for patterns in the cosmos that might improve the participation of my writing group members and the experience that they have once they visit.  More and more, I see a posting on other business and organizational pages that looks like this:

“What do YOU want our Google+/Facebook/Twitter postings to share?  How can we make this page better for you?”

I, um, hate to ask this, but isn’t that like asking customers of, say, a bakery why they came into the store to start with?

At the same time, I can see the conundrum.  Figuring out what gets people to participate on social network pages is roughly on par with figuring out how to cure cancer or eliminate the common cold.  But asking outright?  Isn’t that action displaying a complete and total lack of imagination?  After all, if we give you, the business or organizational page, the answer, then everyone will do it.

So it’s a lot of trial and error...and probably re-assessing online presence.

With the writing group, there seems to be three ways to get the group interested:

• Feature one of the participants’ projects;
• Say something controversial (note:  this also has the potential of dropping connections);
• Actually listen and respond to dialogue that participants bring up themselves, instead of treating it like a formula.

Oh, that last one was so hard to learn, especially since there so many articles about the “right” way to social network.

The thing is, I’ve found that if the participants start the dialogue and are strengthened by the moderator, they tend to stay longer and they tend to see the business or organization as one that recognizes their contributions.  In other words, loyal customers.

For that reason, I’m sticking with the last option, which is a remarkably simple solution, if I do say so myself.  Or, I should say, if my participants do say so themselves.